|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 15, 2014 13:24:14 GMT
Mulling over one at the moment (I've started pulling it together), and I've got a couple of things to submit to the scrutiny and cognitive power of the board.
Point of divergence is that Jeremy Thorpe loses North Devon in 1970, as he very nearly did in reality. My questions therefore are:
1. If Thorpe loses, who is the most likely replacement?
2. Were Thorpe to lose but Michael Winstanley to hold on, how much clout does Winstanley have?
3. Is there anyway back for Thorpe, and how long can a Monday Clubber like Tim Keigwin keep the seat?
4. Is an alternative leader likely to do better or worse than Thorpe if the Heath years pan out in the same way?
The last one particularly interests me. For all I've read about Thorpe being flamboyant and popular, when I've spoken about Seventies politics with relatives they've tended to say that they thought of him as a clown. I'd be particularly interested to hear the view of those who were around then.
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,288
|
Post by Tony Otim on Oct 15, 2014 14:53:58 GMT
In terms of no.3, I would have thought that if he stood again, Thorpe would have stood a very good chance of regaining in 1974 given the general movement and that he probably wouldn't have lost by much in the first place.
1. Well of the 5 remaining MPs, Grimond's already been leader. It's maybe too early for Steel at 32yo. Johnston's the only one who never stood for leader, so I imagine it would come down to Hooson vs Pardoe. Pardoe to take it. If Winstanley held on I'd imagine he'd definitely have been in the mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 15, 2014 15:16:22 GMT
Mulling over one at the moment (I've started pulling it together), and I've got a couple of things to submit to the scrutiny and cognitive power of the board. Point of divergence is that Jeremy Thorpe loses North Devon in 1970, as he very nearly did in reality. My questions therefore are: 1. If Thorpe loses, who is the most likely replacement? 2. Were Thorpe to lose but Michael Winstanley to hold on, how much clout does Winstanley have? 3. Is there anyway back for Thorpe, and how long can a Monday Clubber like Tim Keigwin keep the seat? 4. Is an alternative leader likely to do better or worse than Thorpe if the Heath years pan out in the same way? The last one particularly interests me. For all I've read about Thorpe being flamboyant and popular, when I've spoken about Seventies politics with relatives they've tended to say that they thought of him as a clown. I'd be particularly interested to hear the view of those who were around then. Yes, I was around. He appeared dapper, personable, shallow and lightweight. Good on soundbite radio panels but disappointing on detail and serious issues in HOC and in print. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 15, 2014 18:55:15 GMT
Some scenarios then:
1. Thorpe and Winstanley lose, Pardoe takes over.
2. Thorpe loses and Winstanley wins, Pardoe still takes over.
3. Thorpe loses and Winstanley wins, but Winstanley takes over.
Under which of those scenarios are the Liberals able to achieve more by-election success and/or a greater level of success in 1974?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 15, 2014 19:08:23 GMT
There's a fourth scenario that Thorpe, Winstanley and Pardoe lose. The fifth scenario is that they all lose and David Steel does too.
Then Cyril Smith is exposed as a paedophile during the Rochdale byelection and finishess behind Lord Sutch. The Liberal party is then dissolved
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 15, 2014 19:24:43 GMT
There's a fourth scenario that Thorpe, Winstanley and Pardoe lose. The fifth scenario is that they all lose and David Steel does too. Then Cyril Smith is exposed as a paedophile during the Rochdale byelection and finishess behind Lord Sutch. The Liberal party is then dissolved Christ...imagine that. The fallout would be enormous. You'd imagine that a third force would soon emerge though. |
|
|
|
Post by mrhell on Oct 15, 2014 19:38:03 GMT
Johnston won by 2674 so his election was hardly close. I suspect we'd still have won Sutton and Cheam later in 1972.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 15, 2014 20:38:54 GMT
Johnston won by 2674 so his election was hardly close. I suspect we'd still have won Sutton and Cheam later in 1972. I suspect you would. I get the feeling that, whilst less obviously high profile, the other possible leaders in a post-Thorpe era wouldn't have done worse than Thorpe. Indeed, they might have recaptured the intellectual rigour of the Grimond era and used it to decent effect, and captured those Liberal-leaners with little time for Thorpe. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 15, 2014 21:20:13 GMT
There's a fourth scenario that Thorpe, Winstanley and Pardoe lose. The fifth scenario is that they all lose and David Steel does too. Then Cyril Smith is exposed as a paedophile during the Rochdale byelection and finishess behind Lord Sutch. The Liberal party is then dissolved Lord Sutch wins the by election and joins the Liberal party. |
|
|
|
Post by mrhell on Oct 15, 2014 22:46:50 GMT
Given Smith was a former Labour Lord Mayor I'm not sure they would have done well either. Perhaps the Tories or even the anti-immigration candidate might have won.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Oct 16, 2014 7:34:58 GMT
There's a fourth scenario that Thorpe, Winstanley and Pardoe lose. The fifth scenario is that they all lose and David Steel does too. Then Cyril Smith is exposed as a paedophile during the Rochdale byelection and finishess behind Lord Sutch. The Liberal party is then dissolved Lord Sutch wins the by election and joins the Liberal party. He wasn't that much of a loony! |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 16, 2014 8:46:59 GMT
Lord Sutch wins the by election and joins the Liberal party. He wasn't that much of a loony! In hindsight, many of his ideas appeal more than David Tredinnick's. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Oct 16, 2014 9:52:18 GMT
Some of David Tredinnick's ideas are about as welcome as cancer. Which can, no doubt, be cured by a bucket of water a day.  |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 16, 2014 17:40:16 GMT
Some of David Tredinnick's ideas are about as welcome as cancer. Which can, no doubt, be cured by a bucket of water a day. He probably thinks you can cure drowning by diluting water in water. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Oct 16, 2014 19:47:29 GMT
As I've said before, I read somewhere a few years ago that apparently the Tories in 1970 believed they could reduce the Liberals to 3 seats which they thought would mean the party would be wrapped up with the remaining MPs either joining the Tories or Labour. But Heath and his advisors decided to "go easy" on them because they thought it might be "useful" to have the Liberal party around, for some reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 21, 2014 12:27:06 GMT
As I've said before, I read somewhere a few years ago that apparently the Tories in 1970 believed they could reduce the Liberals to 3 seats which they thought would mean the party would be wrapped up with the remaining MPs either joining the Tories or Labour. But Heath and his advisors decided to "go easy" on them because they thought it might be "useful" to have the Liberal party around, for some reason. I heard the same but about 1950 and Churchill- the influence of the Bonham-Carters being the key thing there. Churchill could easily have revoked the pacts in Bolton and Huddersfield and killed them off outside the Celtic fringe. |
|
|
|
Post by Zardoz on Oct 30, 2014 18:59:05 GMT
There's a fourth scenario that Thorpe, Winstanley and Pardoe lose. The fifth scenario is that they all lose and David Steel does too. Then Cyril Smith is exposed as a paedophile during the Rochdale byelection and finishess behind Lord Sutch. The Liberal party is then dissolved Christ...imagine that. The fallout would be enormous. You'd imagine that a third force would soon emerge though. Indeed. During the 20th Century, there was always a place for a party that identified with the Liberal tradition - research has suggested that, even at its lowest point, about 7% of the electorate identified themselves as being part of this tradition. I think we have moved on from that, but there is still a clear role for a party with Liberal values - I hope one emerges at some point! |
|
